Guzman v. Blanche

Circuit 1Aug 7, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 70/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Affirmed

The First Circuit denied Salvadoran petitioner Lesvi Lucia Monzon Guzman’s petition for review of a BIA order that had rejected her applications for asylum and withholding of removal. The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency’s finding that none of the harm she feared or suffered was ‘on account of’ a statutorily protected ground, so the nexus requirement for both asylum and withholding failed.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether the ‘one central reason’ causation standard that governs asylum claims also applies to withholding-of-removal claims, or whether withholding requires only that a protected ground be ‘a reason’ for the feared persecution.

Circuit Positions

Circuit 2Circuit 3Circuit 5

Withholding of removal requires the stricter ‘one central reason’ standard (same as asylum).

Circuit 9

Withholding of removal is satisfied if a protected ground is merely ‘a reason’ (more lenient).

Circuit 1(this circuit)

Issue unresolved / court declines to decide standard in this circuit.

Conflict Summary

Several circuits have held that an applicant seeking withholding of removal must show that a protected ground was ‘one central reason’ for the persecution (the same heightened standard that applies to asylum). Other circuits apply a more lenient test, requiring only that a protected ground be ‘a reason’—i.e., one of potentially several motives—for the persecution. In this opinion, the First Circuit expressly notes the divide but declines to choose a side.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Lesvi Lucia Monzon Guzman
Appellee:Todd Blanche, Acting Attorney General

Legal Counsel

Appellant:Jonathan Ng; Omar Rahman; Abdul Wahab Niaz; Bhuvanyaa Vijay; Law Offices of Johanna M. Herrero
Appellee:Christina R. Zeidan; Brett A. Shumate; Lisa M. Arnold; Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division